Reviews

This film fails mainly due to it's convoluted idea of what philosophy is. Much like God's Not Dead, the film twists the basic concepts of philosophy to fulfill its own purposes and completely avoids any real attempt at philosophical reasoning or examination. In this case, the supposedly high-honors philosophy class focuses almost entirely on logic problems and fanciful what-if scenarios that have more to do with probability and micro-managing than anything else. Not only does the majority of the lesson totally ignore spirituality, existentialism, and morality, but when they do pop up they are treated as if they are enemies of philosophical thought because the defy cold reasoning and logic in some way. Then there's the professor, who intentionally cheats and manipulates the "mind games" just to agitate the boyfriend of one of the students he slept with, which would have been an interesting twist if it actually ended up having any real impact on the topics at hand. The fact alone that an advanced philosophy class would discuss a scenario involving perpetuation of the human species after a cataclysmic event without even debating the need to do so sets this film far below the intellectual level it so desperately wants to display. It's a good thing that they changed the title from The Philosophers, as that would have been a worst case example of false advertising. Or to sum up: there's nothing worse than a film that thinks it's smarter than it is.

The biggest trap one can fall into when reviewing a film like God's Not Dead is immediately taking the "I'm reviewing the film, not the message" approach. God's Not Dead is a message movie, so reviewing it with examining the actual message is like reviewing Transformers without talking about giant fighting robots. And since many positive reviews of the film invariably defend it by claiming that negative reviewers are merely reactionary Atheists angry that the film has disproved them (if you think I'm kidding, just scroll through the IMDb reviews for a minute or two), avoiding the religious debate that anchors the film is little more than an exercise in futility.

God's Not Dead falls firmly in the category of Christian Propaganda film; not because it promotes God and Christianity, but because it does so the way that all propaganda films do: by creating a straw man argument supported by characters and situations specifically designed to defeat the alternate viewpoint at odds with the message. This is not an attack on the film's message, but rather a critical appraisal of the mechanics of the film's argument, which isn't so much that God is very much alive, but that those who believe in God - or more precisely, a Christian God - face constant persecution and challenges to their faith by snotty, angry, and downright abusive Atheists.

The main Atheist and straw man of the film is college philosophy Professor Radisson, played by Kevin Sorbo, whose career ironically peaked with his portrayal of Greek demigod Hercules. Professor Radisson is the film's main antagonist, who sets everything into motion by asking his class to admit that God is Dead so they can skip theological discussions for the semester. When devout Christian and avid Newsboys fan Josh refuses, he's threatened with a failing grade unless he concedes to the demand or proves God's existence.

This main premise of the film, meant to embody the mythical bogeyman of the anti-Christian left-wing collegiate intelligentsia, is in and of itself completely ludicrous. The idea that a Philosophy professor would threaten to fail a student for not denying his own religious faith, and be notorious enough for doing so that class registrars are motivated to warn crucifix-laden students to switch classes, already stretches the limits of willful disbelief. That a philosophy professor would then demand a student unequivocally prove anything, let alone the existence of God, demonstrates an overall lack of understanding of philosophy. Radisson's thinly-veiled hostility towards Josh's faith becomes open hostility when he later physically confronts Josh and threatens to prevent him from ever getting a law degree (um... okay...) if he keeps trying to embarrass him in front of his students, an act that would most likely impact one's teaching career, God or no God.

Granted, the argument could be made that Radisson is not meant to represent all philosophy professors, just a bad one. If that were the case, however, there would be no need to include the dinner party scene at Radisson's home in which a collection of fellow philosophy professors not only support his Prove God or Fail challenge to his student, but also join him in openly ridiculing his young Christian girlfriend for being Christian and storing wine in her trunk. But there is, and the purpose of this is to show that we are not just dealing with one twisted professor, but a vast conspiracy of institutionalized anti-Christian aggression.

But intellectual snobbery isn't enough for the film, which needs to invoke a monumental David and Goliath battle between the faithful and those angry Atheists, so Josh is also pitted against his girlfriend of six years, who demands that he capitulate to Radisson's demands because flunking a humanities elective will jeopardize his future law degree and their entire future together. When he ignores her ultimatum and takes on the task of proving God's existence to a Freshman philosophy class, she immediately breaks up with him - and right after he got her tickets to see the Newsboys for an anniversary gift. This is probably the most realistic part of the film, as I can easily recall the number of girlfriends I've lost because I wouldn't deny the existence of a supreme being in exchange for course credits. We never meet Josh's parents, but he does mention briefly in a couple of asides that they want him to deny God as well. So much for parental guidance.

These are the only direct foils to Josh's faith, but the film gives us some pseudo-Atheist side stories in poor man's Magnolia fashion to illustrate it's point. Not that they really do, mind you. In fact, the parallel story lines intertwined with the God's Not Dead argument don't support the existence of God as much as the belief that people who don't believe are hostile, empty shells. Indirectly related to Radisson is his girlfriend's brother Mark, who isn't an Atheist as much as he is a sociopathic douche bag. He's supposed to stand in as an example of the evils of corporate greed (no arguments there), refusing to visit his dementia-ridden mother, engaging in insider trading, and dumping his girlfriend when she ruins his company partnership celebration by telling him she's been diagnosed with cancer. He's given a glimpse of redemption when a late-night visit to his mother includes her warning him of the devil's trickery in a lucid moment right out of Exorcist 3, but in the end he discard's God's message and speeds off in his BMW. Not sure what the character of Mark lends to the argument for God's existence, other than that most nonbelievers are colossal dicks.

You can read the rest of this review (IMDB only allows 1,000 words) by going to http://moviesucktastic.blogspot.com/2016/04/film-review- gods-not-dead-2014.html